The lower court rejected Defendant’s assertion on mental and physical disability as stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on mental disorder, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Meanwhile, according to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance and asserted only mental and physical disorder and unreasonable sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to self-defense, incomplete hearing, omission of judgment, etc. is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.